Welcome to Texas justice: You might beat the rap, but you won't beat the ride.

Friday, April 27, 2012

Oddsmaker: When judge finds willful Brady violation, what are chances state bar will discipline?

Here's your chance to play oddsmaker.

A judge in Denton County says two prosecutors withheld evidence and committed prosecutorial misconduct, banning the pair from his courtroom for the offense. Reported the Denton Record-Chronicle ("Two banned from Burgess' court," April 7):

A state district judge has banned two assistant district attorneys
assigned to his courtroom from returning, ruling that they committed
prosecutorial misconduct and don’t have “the innate intellect of a
fifth-grader.”

Bill Schultz and Forest Beadle were working as
family violence prosecutors, trying Silvano Uriostegui on a charge of
aggravated assault with a deadly weapon in the 158th District courtroom
of Judge Steve Burgess. After Burgess’ March 2 ruling that they
willfully withheld exculpatory evidence from the defense — evidence that
would have helped in his defense — Schultz was moved to the district
attorney’s civil division and Beadle was moved into the 16th District
Court.

Both men declined comment, citing policy to refer questions
to the first assistant district attorney, who acts as spokeswoman for
the department.

District Attorney Paul Johnson has defended the
two prosecutors, and Jamie Beck, first assistant district attorney, said
they were not disciplined but rather counseled
on the law as it pertains to the sections the judge ruled they violated
during that trial. She said they would be required to take remedial
courses in issues surrounding exculpatory evidence.

The prosecutors did not inform defense counsel that their star eyewitness had not, as earlier represented, positively identified the defendant, her husband, instead referring to the suspect as "he or she" and declaring she never saw a face.

The Record-Chronicle adds that the situation - though not a formal grievance - has been forwarded to the state bar:

Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct provide that such
conduct as the two prosecutors were found to have committed should be
reported to the disciplinary council of the State Bar of Texas. Johnson,
in a three-page letter to the council, wrote that he was satisfying
that requirement but that he was not submitting a grievance against [prosecutors Bill]
Schultz and [Forrest] Beadle. He defended their actions, stating that they did not
intentionally withhold evidence.

If the conclusion of the Record-Chronicle account accurately portrays it, Judge Burgess sounds furious over the incident:

In his ruling on the writ of habeas corpus, the judge was detailed in his criticism of the way the evidence was handled.

“My
jaw dropped to the ground when Mrs. Uriostegui testified the way that
she did,” Burgess said in his ruling. “I was shocked. And for the state
to actually know this and not disclose it, the only good thing I can say
from this miserable hearing is at least Forrest Beadle told the truth
and was not evasive and was straightforward. I don’t particularly like
his answers, but he at least was honest.”

Burgess apparently was
referring to notes Beadle made during the hearing that were subpoenaed
by Amador that Amador was making another “[expletive] Brady motion.”

Burgess
said that he could not fathom how someone who had been to law school
and had practiced as long as Schultz and Beadle could not know they were
violating rules of exculpatory evidence.

“And how disingenuous it
is to get up here and testify that you don’t think that it’s Brady that
the victim can’t identify by face or by anything other than smell and a
boot who the attacker is ... ,” he said. “I’m going to have to ban both
Mr. Beadle and Mr. Schultz from my courtroom. They’re not allowed to
appear in this courtroom until I rule otherwise.”

Burgess said
that it was particularly sad that the actions of the prosecutors robbed
Maria Uriostegui of justice for the injuries she suffered. He found that
the prosecutors goaded the defense into entering a plea bargain to
avoid an acquittal in the case.

“A woman that was knifed nine
times in the gut and elsewhere doesn’t get justice because nobody can
read Brady, understand Brady, or has the innate intellect of a
fifth-grader,” the judge said.

My question: Given that the only prosecutor in memory publicly sanctioned by the state bar was Terry McEachern from the infamous Tulia drug stings - and that a recent survey of prosecutor misconduct findings by Texas appellate courts found no examples resulting in public state bar discipline - what are the odds the state bar publicly sanctions either or both of these prosecutors?

For my part, even if every jot and tittle of the judge's criticism is accurate, I couldn't go higher than 5% and would have a hard time justifying that number. Terry McEachern was disciplined because in that one case lightning struck, national and even international media honed in on the tiny South Plains community, and the activities he'd concealed of his undercover officer, Tom Coleman, were too well documented to ignore (largely thanks to mi amigos Nate Blakeslee and Jeff Blackburn, to give credit where it's due). So much attention had been drawn to the case IMO that the state bar disciplinary committee felt they would discredit themselves if they didn't act. But the system shouldn't require the case to be the subject of a 60 Minutes segment or a BBC documentary before the state bar mandarins decide to rein in rogue prosecutors. As a starting point, when judges tell them prosecutorial misconduct is going on in their courtroom and the elected DA's response is to move alleged Brady violator to another court, that should send up enough red flags to warrant a fuller investigation, even if the prosecutors' boss didn't submit a formal grievance.

22 comments:

Of course, under the current system, a necessary (though by no means sufficient) condition for the state bar to act is the filing of a formal complaint. The bar does not investigate on its own initiative, even with the sort of official and publicly available finding that was made in this case. Will Judge Burgess do so? Will the defense attorney do so? Will Mr. Uriostegui do so? It would be very interesting to know more about what barriers---real, imagined, or somewhere in between---exist to filing complaints in the first instance. In thinking about a menu of possible reforms, perhaps the question of what triggers state bar inquiry should be on the table.

You've mentioned several times now the recent survey of prosecutor misconduct findings. Do you have a link to that survey or know how we can see a list of the cases that were included in that study? That could be interesting.

11:34, it's really impossible to tell how often prosecutorial misconduct occurs, certainly from these surveys; there are flaws in any possible methodology you might use to estimate. All these data tell us is that - among cases identified - when it happens, the CA and TX state bars seldom sanction for it.

I'd say odds of any kind of sanction by state bar are pretty slim. You brought up the McEachern incident. Actually he only got a slap on the wrist in comparison with what he might have gotten. License suspension, on probation for how long, a year. He could keep right on practicing, could probably still be DA apart from the DUI in NM. If the DUI had been in Texas, DPS ,probably would have ignored.

Where do you find the cases which were indentified for inclusion in the Texas study. I'm not doubting the good intentions of those who did the study, I just think it might be helpful if people could see for themselves what the conduct of the prosecutors was in the cases they relied upon? Is that information available online?

We need more judges like this ,I've seen a judge over look valuable information in a case, act like a two year old with his voice and demeanor,nevermind looking over seeing the bailiff playing on his flip screen cell phone for the whole case hearing , there is no justice that can be done towards a judges,lawyers any court employeed personal can act,say and do as they please ,

2012.04.28.Sa.T0623 EDTSome probably illegal ideas ( do not attempt or threaten them in the United States )

¶ 1 Induce the disciplinary body with an offer it can not refuse , to force the rogues to the dock and sanction them appropriately .

¶ 2 Barrett's Model 82A1®

Rogue prosecutors will continue to be rogues until either the RISK:REWARD ratio is increased to such a level that they will change themselves , or they are no longer registered as lawyers or they are dead .

Hey Grits, I love a blawg / blog post with a Q. and thanks for asking.

You might be a lil too generous with a ceiling of 5%. I'm at .5% and dropping. Especially since we learned that "McEachern the Miserable" was the only one in recent memory. Adding insult to injury (via Mr. Kiker) we learn it was only for looks.

*I propose that we (whom-ever it may concern) take a cue from what seems to get the State Bar's attention. Blitzing (all forms of media, state & local reps. including Mr. & Mrs. Governor) in mass for a set amount of time for each & every account of prosecutorial misconduct. We might as well consider a Petition for each incident over at wwww.change.org for the cherry on top & beg Grits to deliver them to the board (since you are in the area). I'd do it if someone sponsored it. To be exact - "Documented Incidents" via the utilization of; certified copies of a Case File, Defense Case Files, Crime Victims Statements, Alibis Statements, Police Incident Report, Constable's Office Warrant Records, and / or Police Photo.

Just a thought but the odds are slim that anyone will have the energy to commit to anything other than their own experience. Thanks anyway.

Well hats off to Judge Burgess! Judges and prosecutors should realize correcting a mistake is far better politically and professionally than covering it up. Dallas has a string of exonerees and Craig Watkins has gained national praise for his conviction integrity unit.

Also we could have a gatekeeper for the State Bar + SCJC. Maybe a lawyer's coalition group not paid by the State to bird dog and track grievances. They could make sure the I's are dotted, the T's crossed and make it more public. Secrecy = corruption.

Hey Bryces Battle, consider going over to wwww.change.org to get your petition up and running with all of the pertinent proof to garner support from the public at large. We'll be more than happy to sign it and hopefully a few GFB readers will also.

If all of the appeals have been exhausted consider contacting the Innocence Project of Texas for assistance. Thanks.

I have testified in this court and found the Court to be less than candid. In fact, because my testimony was regarding an issue with the Court, I was threatened by the Court with jail and prosecution for perjury "before" I testified because my memory of the facts differed from the Court. After my testimony and cross, the Court realized I was correct and never even appologized. This judge is extremely immature, irresponsible and does not have the proper temperment to sit on the bench. He claims to be a christian but my take is that he will use anything he can to make himself look good. God help anyone who has to be in his court.

If one was to read the comment left by the tick tock time stamp 4:48 PM, one might miss the contradictions.

He / she / it, states that the court threatened perjury charges if testifying untruthfully. (Sounds like good advice), don’t lie, whatever you do don’t lie). Throw in a lil God help the cause and boom we are to believe that the Judge is the problem.

I wish to divert the hijacking attempt of the GFB Comment Section back to the original post and elevate Judge Steve Burgess of the 158th District Court status to that of Public Hero. Regardless of his actions being coordinated by a personal CYA motivation or simply doing the right thing for once ,doesn't matter. The only thing that does, is that the rogue ADAs have been busted named & banned.

History (certified case files) will reveal if they (bad guys) have a pattern of corruption leading up the brave actions taken by the court. Look for their names, for they’ll be coming to a court near you or hanging a shingle as they shift gears to represent clueless defendants. Thanks.

Southern, daily and good for you

Grits for Breakfast looks at the Texas criminal justice system, with a little politics and whatever
else suits the author's fancy thrown in. All opinions are my own. The facts belong to everybody. Who is this guy?

"I always tell people interested in these issues that your blog is the most important news source, and have had high-ranking corrections officials tell me they read it regularly."

- Scott Medlock, Texas Civil Rights Project

"a helluva blog"

- Solomon Moore, NY Times criminal justice correspondent

"Congrats on building one of the most read and important blogs on a specific policy area that I've ever seen"

- Donald Lee, Texas Conference of Urban Counties

GFB "is a fact-packed, trustworthy reporter of the weirdness that makes up corrections and criminal law in the Lone Star State" and has "shown more naked emperors than Hans Christian Andersen ever did."

-Attorney Bob Mabry, Woodlands

"Grits really shows the potential of a single-state focused criminal law blog"

- Corey Yung, Sex Crimes Blog

"I regard Grits for Breakfast as one of the most welcome and helpful vehicles we elected officials have for understanding the problems and their solutions."

Tommy Adkisson,Bexar County Commissioner

"dude really has a pragmatic approach to crime fighting, almost like he’s some kind of statistics superhero"